Club News Sheet – No. 155 www.pattayabridge.com 22nd Oct 2005
Mon 17th 1st Bob Short/Gene 59% 2nd David/Kenneth 55%
Wed 19th 1st Dave/Hans 56% 2nd Bjorn/Ian 55%
Fri 21st N-S 1st Dave/Bob 66% 2nd Bill/Mike 53%
21st E-W 1st Chuck/Tomas 59% 2nd Bob Short/Gene 55%
I had too many interesting boards last week, so some of them appear in this issue.
Bidding Quiz Standard American is assumed unless otherwise stated
Hand A Hand B (a) What do you open with Hand A.
Suppose you choose 2♣, the what do you bid after partner bids
♠ AKQJ ♠ Q754 (b) 2♦ (negative or waiting), or (c) 2NT (8-10 balanced)?
♥ KQ42 ♥ 10632
♦ 6 ♦ K75 With Hand B LHO opens 1♣ and partner doubles. You choose
♣ AQJ5 ♣ 96 to bid 1♥ and partner bids 3♥, what do you do?
Hand C Hand D With Hand C you open 1♠ and partner raises to 4♠, what do you
do?
♠ AJ ♠ Q853
♥ AJ1094 ♥ AQ62 With Hand D LHO opens 2♠, passed to you. (a) what do you do?
♦ KQ3 ♦ K73 Suppose you choose to double – partner bids 3♣ and RHO bids
♣ 1062 ♣ A10 3♠, (b) what do you do now?
Hand E Hand F With Hand E RHO opens 1♣ and you double. Partner bids 1♥
(what an obliging partner!). What do you bid?
♠ K8 ♠ KQJ9732
♥ KQJ98 ♥ A9
♦ AQ4 ♦ 3 What do you open with hand F?
♣ K43 ♣ AQ9
Editorial – About our clubs
Dave and I were asked about the Wednesday funds, so here’s the complete picture.
I run the Monday and Friday clubs; I look after the money and also membership fees and that goes towards the running of the club - the web-site (very expensive), cards, bidding boxes, boards, news-sheets etc etc.
The Wednesday club is run by Dave (although I do help out occasionally) and these funds are used for what Dave (and I) think fit. Currently they have paid for trophies and the Jack computer program. Members are invited to borrow Jack.
Club membership is 1000 bht per year (cheaper if you join later in the year). Membership entitles you to play at all 3 venues for just 50 bht a time; non-members pay 100 bht.
A comedy of errors? Board 12 from Wednesday 12th
A few strange bids here! As at least two players had no idea what they were doing, I’d better clarify bidding after a 1NT opening has been overcalled: -
Dealer: ♠ KQ103
West ♥ A1074 West North East South
N-S vul ♦ 5 1NT (1) 2♣ (2) 3♦ (3) pass
♣ QJ96 pass (4) dbl (5) pass 3♥
all pass
♠ 764 N ♠ J52
♥ KJ52 W E ♥ 84
♦ A83 S ♦ KQ1064
♣ AK10 ♣ 742
♠ A98
♥ Q93
♦ J972
♣ 853
(1) You all know me by now, I would not open 1NT with this hand (knock off a point for the 4333 type shape and treat it as a 14 point hand). Anyway, perhaps West had sized up the opposition?
(2) Showing at least 5-4 in the majors (Multi Landy). With this nice shape I won’t argue with it being a major card short.
(3) What is this?? Standard is that it’s game forcing. There ‘obviously’ is no such thing as a pre-emptive bid after partner has opened with a strong NT!?
(4) Obviously I would have bid here (a ‘natural’ 3♥ - showing a stopper there) as I would take 3♦ as strong and forcing.
(5) Equally obviously North should pass here – West has passed a presumed forcing 3♦ bid, South has promised zero and North has no more than (one could say not as much as) he has already shown. It appears that North intended this as penalties! Apparently his ‘thoughts’ went along these lines – partner did not bid a major after my Multi Landy so he must have ♦’s! No further comment by me.
And what happened? 3♥ went 3 down for a deserved botton to N-S, well, North anyway.
The bottom lines: -
- Sort out what you play after partner’s 1NT opening is overcalled. I recommend Lebensohl.
- Playing Lebensohl or not, 3♦ is forcing here as a natural 2♦ is available with a weak ♦ hand. (and, actually, you can show an invitational ♦ hand by going via 2NT, Lebensohl).
Who’s the dick-head? Board 25 from Wednesday 12th
Dealer: ♠ Q103
East ♥ KQ4 West North East South
Both vul ♦ Q10964 - - 1NT pass
♣ Q10 2♦ pass 2♥ all pass
♠ 75 N ♠ KJ96
♥ J7652 W E ♥ A108
♦ KJ52 S ♦ 87
♣ 97 ♣ AK53
♠ A842 I was dummy (West) and when the ♦A was
♥ 93 led I (humorously?) commented that South
DUMMY ♦ A3 obviously has the ♦K if he led the ♦A.
♣ J8642
Anyway, South then continued with the ♦3 and declarer finessed!!
And what happened? 2♥ thus went one down when South got his obvious ruff, with 2♥ making easily at other tables. East then call South a ‘dick-head’ for leading an ace without the king. Can you find a suitable word to describe East? The bottom lines: -
- Nobody in their right mind is going the lead an ace from AQ, especially if a strong NT was opened on their right!
Do not take a ‘finesse’ which is 100% certain to fail and give defenders a ruff!
A word about inverted Attitude
There are a number of different signalling techniques, but there are three distinct types that are independent. It appears that one of our top players got confused when his partner wanted to play ‘inverted signals’ – (what his partner meant was inverted attitude signals).
(a) Telling partner about your holding in a suit when he leads it (some give attitude, some give count).
(b) Telling partner about your holding in a suit when declarer leads it (give count if it’s going to help partner and not help declarer.).
(c) Discard Signals. When you discard (say on a suit declarer is leading). Then your first discard should tell partner what suit you like and don’t like – I recommend Lavinthal (McKenny) as the ‘club standard’.
These 3 are largely independent of each other and a very large number of players in this club prefer ‘inverted attitude’ – i.e. low to encourage for (a) above. Indeed, I also prefer this scheme as it makes more sense than throwing a high card from a suit that you like. It is common in Europe but not in America.
Some players also play inverted count but I don’t advice this and see no point.
Anyway, if someone wants to play inverted attitude for (a) that that does not affect discards – he still plays count at (b) and Lavinthal at (c) in the normal way and this is very common in this club.
And note that if you do decide to play inverted attitude and say partner leads ♦A against a ♠ contract, then holding ♦Q72 you play the two to encourage; holding ♦72 you still play the ♦2 to encourage (you want a ruff). Some people get confused here – this is not count, but attitude, and so in this situation you play low from a doubleton. Of course if you do find this confusing then you can also play inverted count!
The Trump promotion Board 17 from Wednesday 12th
Now most of the articles in the news-sheets are about the bidding; so just for a change we’ll have one on defensive play: -
Dealer: ♠ AK10543
North ♥ J West North East South
Love all ♦ Q53 - 1♠ pass 2♥
♣ 1074 pass 2♠ all pass
♠ Q7 N ♠ J98
♥ K74 W E ♥ 10932
♦ A9876 S ♦ J10
♣ Q86 ♣ AK92
♠ 62
® ♥ AQ865
DUMMY ♦ K42
♣ J53
East led the ♣A. Now West new that his partner held the ♣K – East was the same East as the previous deal when he called somebody a ‘dick-head’ for leading the ace without the king. Anyway, E-W had agreed to play inverted attitude signals (so low to encourage) and so West played the ♣6. North played the ♣4 I would have played the ♣7 in order to confuse the E-W signals.
Anyway, there was no need to try to confuse East as even with the ♣4 played to the first trick he could not work out that partner had encouraged and so switched to the ♦J.
Now normally West would have ducked this (retaining the ♦A over dummy’s ♦K) but he knew exactly what was going on. West took the ♦A, led the ♣Q followed by the ♣8 and sat back waiting for partner to do the right thing in this position: -
Dealer: ♠ AK10543 What do you think that East should lead here,
North ♥ J having just won the last trick with the ♣K?
Love all ♦ Q5 The answer is that he should lead the ♣9.
♣ - It matters not if dummy ruffs, the important thing
is that West knows that it’s the 13th ♣ and he will
♠ Q7 N ♠ J98 ruff high – forcing declarer to ruff even higher
♥ K74 W E ♥ 10932 and thus promoting East’s trump holding.
♦ 9876 S ♦ 10
♣ - ♣ 9 And what happened?
♠ 62 East lamely led a ♥ and scored just one trump trick.
® ♥ AQ865 Every other N-S went down.
DUMMY ♦ K4
♣ -
The bottom lines: -
- Understand trump promotion!
- Look at partner’s signals
- As declarer, false-card if you want to disrupt the defender’s signals.
Don’t Pre-empt then bid again! Board 27 from Wednesday 12th
I say the same things week after week, but who listens? …..
Dealer: ♠ J8753
South ♥ KQ6 West(me) North East South
Love all ♦ J53 - - - 3♦ (1)
♣ 86 dbl (2) 4♦ (3) 4© (4) 5♦ (5)
dbl (6) all pass
♠ AKQ104 N ♠ 93
♥ J72 W E ♥ 108543
♦ 9 S ♦ A62
♣ AK102 ♣ J93
♠ 6
♥ A9
♦ KQ10874
♣ Q754
(1) A real top-of-the-range pre-empt, so South decided to ‘upgrade ‘it to 3♦ (as opposed to 2♦). It’s 21 (for the rule of 20) and a 1♦ opening is very reasonable. But I’m an easy goin’ guy and won’t argue too much with the 3♦ pre-empt.
(2) And, indeed, the opening bid makes it awkward for West. He surely has to double and I happen to know what his plan was (it was I!). If partner responded 3♥ then I was planning 3♠ (showing a good hand). If partner responded 4♥ then I would have left him there.
(3) I totally agree with this bid. When partner makes a 3-level pre-empt then raise to 4 with 3-card support, virtually regardless of strength (The Law).
(4) Perhaps a bit pushy as a free bid shows values, but with 5 ♥’s I think that it’s justified and I certainly won’t argue with my partner’s decision to bid 4♥.
(5) But I will, of course, argue with this. South decided to open with a pre-empt. Full stop. If you open with a pre-empt then do not bid again unless invited. Full stop. Partner’s raising of the anti is not an invitation for you to bid again. South’s ‘excuse’ was that he had a good hand and that 5♦ may well work out – it’s falling on deaf ears here. ‘Everybody’ knows my views – if you pre-empt, then that’s it!
(6) West, of course, was more than happy to double with his top cards for defence and only 3 poor ♥’s.
And what happened? 5♦ doubled went two down for 300 away and a deserved bottom to N-S. Whether 4♥ would have made or not nobody knows, as nobody else bid game with the E-W cards. It’s certainly not a straightforward contract for East as he has entry problems to hand on the presumed ♦K lead and he may well lose the obvious 3 ♥’s and another trick - a ♦ or something else, depending upon his line of play.
The bottom lines: -
- Don’t change horses in mid-stream. If you have decided to open with a pre-empt then there’s nothing you can do about it later – just hope it works out!
- Do not bid again having pre-empted. Said that before?
The 2♣ Opener and responses
There has been a lot of discussion about this (and a ‘waiting’ 2♦ response) at the club recently. So I’ll give a couple of hands from the club and then give the ‘definitive’ solution.
♠ AQJ6 N ♠ K982 West East
♥ A5 W E ♥ K74 2♣ (1) 2NT (2)
♦ KQJ86 S ♦ 1072 3♣ (3) 3♠ (4)
♣ A10 ♣ KJ3 4♠ (5) pass (6)
First of all, remember this hand from last week’s news-sheet (who should bid Blackwood)? I gave a couple of auctions but this was apparently that from one table. Last week I suggested that it should be East asking bidding Blackwood but one member disagreed:
(1) This is a nice hand. With the KQJ sequence in a 5 card suit I’m happy with a 2♣ opener, with the intention of rebidding 2NT (22-24).
(2) But unfortunately partner got in the 2NT bid – more of responses to 2♣ later.
(3) Apparently this was Stayman. Now this is a new one on me, but I guess reasonable. The main problem (apart from the fact that I don’t like the 2NT response) is that the wrong guy is going to play the hand and it’s also going to be difficult to find a minor suit fit. After a 2♣ opening one should be thinking slam – and it’s quite likely to be in a minor. Baron (initiating a sequence where both players bid 4-card suits up the line) is probably better but I give a completely different scheme later anyway.
(4) The 4-4 ♠ fit is located.
(5) And West confirms this.
Now this East came up to me about my comment last week that East should bid Blackwood in this sort of situation - I said that the only ‘problem’ was the weak ♦ suit but that’s probably OK opposite a 2♣ opener.
He said that East cannot bid Blackwood as a Blackwood bidder promises an ace and he said that West should bid Blackwood at (5). My reaction: -
- Poppycock. A Blackwood bidder does not promise an ace, especially if partner has shown a huge hand (there is another excellent example of this in news-sheet 85). Of course it’s nice to have the security of one ace and if partner starts with a lowly one-level bid then Baby Blackwood that I mentioned last week is a solution.
- Anyway, in this situation West should not be the asker as when he gets a zero ace response it’s far to dangerous to ask for kings with an ace missing. Indeed, it’s generally accepted that all the aces are present when one asks for kings.
- In this situation, with 3 kings, it should be East asking (he also knows that there are values for slam (West does not) and should bid 4NT at (6) and go on to slam with just one ace missing.